He went to ICE to tell agents he had gotten into college Now he and his brother have been deported

originally posted by: NightSkyeB4Dawn
I didn't like it but the law is the law. They don't make exceptions because you may feel that is practical to do so.

I wasn't arguing that there's a set law and punishment right now though, there is. The government just followed it.

My argument was that it's wrong to do so. The law is bad, it's being enforced simply because it's someones job to enforce it. There's no thought being put into the fact if the law is beneficial or not. In the case of these two people, they were a net benefit to the US even though they didn't do everything by the book. If they're a net benefit, then that means the opposite is true too and that we're hurting ourselves by deporting them.

Therefore, it's a bad law because it's not benefiting us when it's being enforced.

dp

a reply to: xuenchen

Good. That's really all I can say here. The law is being enforced, and that law is sensible and vital to securing the USA. Found in the US illegally? Back to wherever you originated you go.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: NightSkyeB4Dawn
I didn't like it but the law is the law. They don't make exceptions because you may feel that is practical to do so.

I wasn't arguing that there's a set law and punishment right now though, there is. The government just followed it.

My argument was that it's wrong to do so. The law is bad, it's being enforced simply because it's someones job to enforce it. There's no thought being put into the fact if the law is beneficial or not. In the case of these two people, they were a net benefit to the US even though they didn't do everything by the book. If they're a net benefit, then that means the opposite is true too and that we're hurting ourselves by deporting them.

Therefore, it's a bad law because it's not benefiting us when it's being enforced.

I wholeheartedly disagree. "Benefit" is subjective at best, immaterial to the law at worst. There are lots of people driving around without driver's licenses, never been in any accident... should they just be allowed to keep violating the law when they're caught? What about the periodic person practicing medicine without any license or even adequate education? If they have a record of happy, healthy patients, should the law be ignored?

The US has some of the most lax, easiest to comply with immigration laws in the developed world, yet we still are the focal point of everyone screaming Draconian! Draconian! when those basic laws are enforced... pretty silly, especially for a nation of laws.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

I take a more pragmatic look at things. If they're here contributing and not harming anyone, then what's the problem?

I figured this would be a position you could appreciate even. Every person that's here and paying taxes is someone broadening the base so that you pay less. Kicking them out costs money, and then reduces our tax revenues too.

To me it's a simple question. Is the person here providing brain power, sweat, or taxes? If the answer to any of those is yes, and they're not actively harming anyone, then lets let them stay and continue contributing.

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

I can understand where you're coming from, insomuch as the dogmatic interpretation 'feels' righteous and true. Laws, however, are not infallible, just as those who write them aren't infallible. Often the structure of laws doesn't leave room for immediate rectification of a personalized situation. For example, if you lived in Nazi German in the late 30's and the law compelled you to notify the authorities of any jews/gypsies/homosexuals in your community, would you feel following it was still the right thing to do? Would you feel addressing your grievances in the Reichstag's halls the appropriate course of action after initially complying with your first encounter (and complying of course)?

Monochrome viewpoints are a willful relinquishment of our free will to do what is right in a specific situation. Laws should exist because they are beneficial and impartial in their application. When they exist in contravention to those principles its subjects have a choice to empower them by following them, or not. Do you think any of the bizarre laws listed here: www.huffingtonpost.com... should be enforced?

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: dragonridr
If they were americans they would be deported. Either they are or they arent coming here illegally doesn't give you special privileges. My wife is from Germany we had to spend money and a lot of time to get her citizenship. She is now an amarican why should thesee two not have to go through what we did??

Your argument is that you did it, so they should too?

What if the policy was wrong when it happened to your wife, should we continue a bad policy in the name of making everyone suffer equally?

I was working two jobs and attending college. As they say where there is a will there is a way. We were role living in a crappy apt. And to make matters worse she was pregnant. People make their own destiny I paid for a lawyer while half the time we were stuck eating Ramon noodles.

The trick was I was attending college and we had goals she even attended law school after the baby was born. If these two wanted to become citizens they would have found a way. Instead they tried to take the easy route. As we can see it didn't pay off trying to do something illegally life has a way of making you regret bad choices.

If they would have done things legally like so many do they would be citizens by now. Hopefully they learn from this and stop looking for short cuts.

originally posted by: Wayfarer
]

Are you equating a trifling inconvenience (procuring documents which are on file and only need be requested/paid for) with an actively hostile immigration policy?

What's hostile about a immigration policy that doesn't allow illegal immigration? Don't make it sound likes it's ICE's fault these idiots didn't go about this the right way, even after given a second chance. If they would have followed our immigration policies, like the rest of their family did, then they would still be here. Stop with the victimization. They were the ones who did things illegally. They have themselves to blame for their problems.

originally posted by: Aazadan


I take a more pragmatic look at things. If they're here contributing and not harming anyone, then what's the problem?

. What are they contributing? They can't legally work, so they can't pay taxes, they probably attended a public school and they got a scholarship that should have gone to a legal resident or citizen of our country?

Every person that's here and paying taxes is someone broadening the base so that you pay less.

Again, without a green card they can not legally work and pay taxes. They used resources and contributed nothing in the way of tax revenue.

originally posted by: pavilWhat are they contributing? They can't legally work, so they can't pay taxes, they probably attended a public school and they got a scholarship that should have gone to a legal resident or citizen of our country?

Regardless of the legal ability to work, they were either supporting themselves or being supported without government assistance. Either money was being sent to them, they were working under the table, or they're wealthy. Any of those is fine. By making them legal we would get even more tax money from them too, rather than just things like sales tax.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: pavilWhat are they contributing? They can't legally work, so they can't pay taxes, they probably attended a public school and they got a scholarship that should have gone to a legal resident or citizen of our country?

Regardless of the legal ability to work, they were either supporting themselves or being supported without government assistance. Either money was being sent to them, they were working under the table, or they're wealthy. Any of those is fine. By making them legal we would get even more tax money from them too, rather than just things like sales tax.

Keep grasping at your straws. So now, illegally working in the country, while here illegally is fine with you?!? Maybe they were selling drugs with MS-13, is that alright with you as well? I love watching you destroy yourself with your own words. You don't know if that family had any direct govt assistance but they most assuredly had tax payer supported public schooling assistance and who knows what other services they have used .

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: burdman30ott6

I take a more pragmatic look at things. If they're here contributing and not harming anyone, then what's the problem?

I figured this would be a position you could appreciate even. Every person that's here and paying taxes is someone broadening the base so that you pay less. Kicking them out costs money, and then reduces our tax revenues too.

To me it's a simple question. Is the person here providing brain power, sweat, or taxes? If the answer to any of those is yes, and they're not actively harming anyone, then lets let them stay and continue contributing.

So it's OK to break laws you don't agree with? And we can pick and choose which laws we want to follow off how many people are harmed.

So if I want to steal your identity because I really don't think that's a crime. And well I'm not going to kill you so you will survive it meaning no one gets hurt.

People amaze me laws are put in place if you don't like the law fine push to have it changed. But to say stupid things like it shouldn't be followed when we hire people to do exactly that. Every country on the planet protects their border. But somehow that's become wrong.

originally posted by: pavil
Keep grasping at your straws. So now, illegally working in the country, while here illegally is fine with you?!? Maybe they were selling drugs with MS-13, is that alright with you as well? I love watching you destroy yourself with your own words. You don't know if that family had any direct govt assistance but they most assuredly had tax payer supported public schooling assistance and who knows what other services they have used .

Work is work, anything that prevents it is merely an artificial barrier added to the system, it only harms us.

I wouldn't be fine with him working for MS-13, that's work that harms others. That's not what was going on though.

originally posted by: dragonridr
So it's OK to break laws you don't agree with? And we can pick and choose which laws we want to follow off how many people are harmed.

So if I want to steal your identity because I really don't think that's a crime. And well I'm not going to kill you so you will survive it meaning no one gets hurt.

People amaze me laws are put in place if you don't like the law fine push to have it changed. But to say stupid things like it shouldn't be followed when we hire people to do exactly that. Every country on the planet protects their border. But somehow that's become wrong.

Following a law just because it's the law is nothing more than blindly accepting authority. Prove to me that authority figures are worthy of that type of loyalty and I'll reconsider my stance. Until then, yes... you should pick and choose which laws to follow. What gets enforced is what the majority wish to enforce through the courts.

If most of society doesn't want to live in a world where identity theft runs rampant, they'll enforce and hopefully prevent it. It's still up to each individual to decide if they want to abide by the law though, or if they think it's just.

If it's not obvious, border enforcement is a law I don't agree with. Limiting who can come here does nothing but hurt us. It's a position for people who are terrified of the rest of the world because of different cultures, or job competition.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: dragonridr
So it's OK to break laws you don't agree with? And we can pick and choose which laws we want to follow off how many people are harmed.

So if I want to steal your identity because I really don't think that's a crime. And well I'm not going to kill you so you will survive it meaning no one gets hurt.

People amaze me laws are put in place if you don't like the law fine push to have it changed. But to say stupid things like it shouldn't be followed when we hire people to do exactly that. Every country on the planet protects their border. But somehow that's become wrong.

Following a law just because it's the law is nothing more than blindly accepting authority. Prove to me that authority figures are worthy of that type of loyalty and I'll reconsider my stance. Until then, yes... you should pick and choose which laws to follow. What gets enforced is what the majority wish to enforce through the courts.

If most of society doesn't want to live in a world where identity theft runs rampant, they'll enforce and hopefully prevent it. It's still up to each individual to decide if they want to abide by the law though, or if they think it's just.

If it's not obvious, border enforcement is a law I don't agree with. Limiting who can come here does nothing but hurt us. It's a position for people who are terrified of the rest of the world because of different cultures, or job competition.

So since your deciding what laws to follow instead of having them changed I can assume you have been in jail. Society decides laws they are necessary when you have groups of people living together. You seem to be more an anarchist and frankly there is no order with anarchists. We would end up with everyone carrying guns and deciding to follow their own rules. Hopefully my rules won't conflict with your rules so I won't have to shoot you. Wow

Nope. They should not be here. Bottom line. No forgiveness. No second chances. If they were so successful here they can go back to where they came from and make a difference there.

a reply to: dragonridr

Sorry to disappoint.

Never been arrested, never been to jail. No criminal record.

There's a difference between disregarding all laws, being an anarchist and not blindly accepting every single law.

Oh, I work on changing laws too but I've only been successful on a city level. It's tough to get appointments with state and federal level people, and get heard out rather than shut down by ideological arguments.

originally posted by: matafuchs
Nope. They should not be here. Bottom line. No forgiveness. No second chances. If they were so successful here they can go back to where they came from and make a difference there.

Why don't you want successful people here?

Sadly no there isn't you don't get to decide what laws you like and will follow and which ones you dont. Love to see that defense used in court. Well your honor I just didn't believe in that law because I can see it didn't apply to me.

To be honest I would like to see immagration made easier I went through a lot trying to get the wife citizenship. However that doesn't mean I think laws should just arbitrarily be ignored either.

Not everyone should be allowed entry would you just leave your front door unlocked with a sign that says come on in? Would you be OK with coming home and finding out two people have decided they were going to live in your house. I'm betting you call the cops to have them remobed for trespassing.